Exar Kun -George Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 2 hours ago, Buorhann said: And the problem? Generally if one or two alliances dislike you, maybe it’s on them and not you. But when half (over half?) of the community does - maaaaaybe it’s on you Your right, we should all apologize to each other, sit and cuddle around a fire and sing camping sounds and ofc live happy ever after.... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, George (James T Kirk) said: Your right, we should all apologize to each other, sit and cuddle around a fire and sing camping sounds and ofc live happy ever after.... Or you could just answer the question posited by the OP. The answer is yes. Protect means protect. 4 hours ago, Roquentin said: tS is a forum darling. This is unverifiable until Alexsheepy adorns us with alliance bling. Quote One must imagine Sisyphus happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, George (James T Kirk) said: Your right, we should all apologize to each other, sit and cuddle around a fire and sing camping sounds and ofc live happy ever after.... Not quite sure where you got that idea, but if thats what you think BK should do - perhaps give it a try. Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 Just now, Buorhann said: Not quite sure where you got that idea, but if thats what you think BK should do - perhaps give it a try. Watch that wording, Buorhann. He didn't explicitly state whether it was happy or happily and that's the sort of wordy syntax we simply can't ignore these days. You never know when a direct ally, or some vaguely connected reaching af dumb posturing entity (Malalolol) might take advantage of a poorly worded statement such as yours. 2 Quote One must imagine Sisyphus happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Titan Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 6 hours ago, Sisyphus said: Or you could just answer the question posited by the OP. The answer is yes. Protect means protect. This is unverifiable until Alexsheepy adorns us with alliance bling. And by protecting a hostile alliance you were joining the war yourself in an aggressive manner. No one is questioning your right to attack BK, but it was clearly an aggressive action. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 8 hours ago, George (James T Kirk) said: You're* right(.) (W)e should all apologize to each other, sit and cuddle around a fire(,) sing camping sounds(,) and ofc live happy ever after.... I call Big Spoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PhantomThiefB Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 On 10/2/2019 at 3:42 AM, Buorhann said: You mean like how the logs leaked about timing N$Os attack on KETOG and BKsphere attack on Chaos? You're upset because we took action ourselves after you adamantly denied knowing about it (While also contradicting yourself too)? I'm confused with the problem here, aren't you guys not allied to Chaos via papers? What's the problem in this situation..? The way I see it, BK Sphere hitting Chaos alone would have nothing to do with KETOG by itself and if N$O had attacked KETOG by itself would that not be two separate wars between 4 mini-spheres going 1-1...? I mean wasn't that the idea behind mini spheres? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Titan Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: I'm confused with the problem here, aren't you guys not allied to Chaos via papers? What's the problem in this situation..? The way I see it, BK Sphere hitting Chaos alone would have nothing to do with KETOG by itself and if N$O had attacked KETOG by itself would that not be two separate wars between 4 mini-spheres going 1-1...? I mean wasn't that the idea behind mini spheres? No the idea was to dominate the game through informal relationships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said: No the idea was to dominate the game through informal relationships. Like the Informal one y'all maintained with NPO? Edited October 3, 2019 by Pasky Darkfire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Bolivar Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said: No one is questioning your right to defend TEst but it was clearly a defensive action. Fixed that for you. Any time. Edited October 3, 2019 by Charles the Tyrant 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said: No the idea was to dominate the game through informal relationships. Except that's precisely false. Of all the narratives you guys vomit out this really is the worst one, informal relationships were burned left and right in pursuit of more dynamic politics, it's unfortunate y'all have locked yourself into your little feedback loop or else you might've actually picked up on that. 1 Quote One must imagine Sisyphus happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Titan Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 25 minutes ago, Sisyphus said: Except that's precisely false. Of all the narratives you guys vomit out this really is the worst one, informal relationships were burned left and right in pursuit of more dynamic politics, it's unfortunate y'all have locked yourself into your little feedback loop or else you might've actually picked up on that. It’s entirely true that the only interest is for BK and NPO to fight while no upper tier alliances truly commit. It’s obvious informal connections are still there when you see Rose being low paper, Rose opting in, ketog chaos collusion, t$/Kerchog collusion, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sisyphus Posted October 3, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 3, 2019 Just now, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said: It’s entirely true that the only interest is for BK and NPO to fight while no upper tier alliances truly commit. It’s obvious informal connections are still there when you see Rose being low paper, Rose opting in, ketog chaos collusion, t$/Kerchog collusion, etc. Now I'm sure it had nothing to do with your caustic and fumbling FA approach at all. Thank you for setting me straight. 1 6 Quote One must imagine Sisyphus happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: I'm confused with the problem here, aren't you guys not allied to Chaos via papers? What's the problem in this situation..? The way I see it, BK Sphere hitting Chaos alone would have nothing to do with KETOG by itself and if N$O had attacked KETOG by itself would that not be two separate wars between 4 mini-spheres going 1-1...? I mean wasn't that the idea behind mini spheres? Feel free to go back and re-read the leak. When your alliance(s) constantly tried to interfere with our war in Surfs Up THEN have that leak happen, I’m sure it doesn’t take a genius to figure it out. As for 1v1, you are aware that you attempted to dogpile again right? So let’s nip that narrative in the bud. Edited October 3, 2019 by Buorhann Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Prefonteen Posted October 3, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 3, 2019 4 hours ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said: And by protecting a hostile alliance you were joining the war yourself in an aggressive manner. No one is questioning your right to attack BK, but it was clearly an aggressive action. No, it was not. See: Sphinx quote. 3 hours ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said: No the idea was to dominate the game through informal relationships. He said, as he tightly squeezed Roquentins hand. 1 hour ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said: It’s entirely true that the only interest is for BK and NPO to fight while no upper tier alliances truly commit. It’s obvious informal connections are still there when you see Rose being low paper, Rose opting in, ketog chaos collusion, t$/Kerchog collusion, etc. I for one am still incredibly close to all my old allies and friends, who did not hold knightfall against me in any way whatsoever! 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lu Xun Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 27 minutes ago, Prefonteen said: No, it was not. See: Sphinx quote. He said, as he tightly squeezed Roquentins hand. I for one am still incredibly close to all my old allies and friends, who did not hold knightfall against me in any way whatsoever! It wouldn't be pragmatic to do so, would it? Quote . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PhantomThiefB Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Buorhann said: Feel free to go back and re-read the leak. When your alliance(s) constantly tried to interfere with our war in Surfs Up THEN have that leak happen, I’m sure it doesn’t take a genius to figure it out. As for 1v1, you are aware that you attempted to dogpile again right? So let’s nip that narrative in the bud. That wasn't a narrative, it was a hypothetical scenario that you were talking about. Which would have been before Surf's up. Why do I need to even explain this when you understood me completely yet choose to troll instead? It's concerning you even think I have a narrative.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 16 minutes ago, Inst said: It wouldn't be pragmatic to do so, would it? What are you talking about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward I Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 50 minutes ago, Prefonteen said: I for one am still incredibly close to all my old allies and friends, who did not hold knightfall against me in any way whatsoever! And you went inactive after you brokered the deal, and then your successor went inactive after he was tasked with implementing it, and you're not t$ gov now, so why do your old friendships matter here? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 15 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: That wasn't a narrative, it was a hypothetical scenario that you were talking about. Which would have been before Surf's up. Why do I need to even explain this when you understood me completely yet choose to troll instead? It's concerning you even think I have a narrative.? You’re right. I’m replying to someone who absolutely has no idea on the talks that occurred. Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PhantomThiefB Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Buorhann said: You’re right. I’m replying to someone who absolutely has no idea on the talks that occurred. The grapevine is a thing of beauty indeed.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevanovia Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 4 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: The grapevine is a thing of beauty indeed.? Did you ever play ‘telephone’ in elementary school? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 45 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: The grapevine is a thing of beauty indeed.? Okay, Gladys Knight. Are the Pips here to back you up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Edward I said: And you went inactive after you brokered the deal, and then your successor went inactive after he was tasked with implementing it, and you're not t$ gov now, so why do your old friendships matter here? It wasn't just my ties on the block when we decided to take a gamble on trusting you ;). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roquentin Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Prefonteen said: It wasn't just my ties on the block when we decided to take a gamble on trusting you ;). I mean whatever strain is gone then and everyone is a big Wilhelm fan once more. He said he wanted to undo the FA damage Kayser and I did to tS and he's done it in spades. You(tS) didn't take a gamble in any real sense on us unless the gamble was whether we'd be up for facilitating some sort of vendetta based on Camelot raids or something or facilitating everyone's dogpile on BK. You had us twisting ourselves into pretzels for you and one disagreement was enough to kill the relationship. You were not interested in working things out. You failed to inform you no longer valued NPO as an ally and that the decision had been made to move on from NPO until you pulled a fast one and signed new allies that had exited the war and essentially told us to go to hell. Edited October 3, 2019 by Roquentin 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.